Letters on voting law, boots on ground, lawless president, Obama’s unfair treatment, reneging on school bond

Need to amend state’s voting law

The state’s voting law has stirred much rancor and ill feelings toward the Legislature and Secretary of State Kris Kobach. But it is not too late to make some modifications to the law to incorporate it into a larger vision.

The intentional meanness of the Kansas Secure and Fair Elections Act lies not only in its title (as though voting was insecure and unfair) but also in its contents, placing the full burden of proof of identity upon the individual. How much kinder and more thoughtful and helpful overall it would have been if the Legislature had prefaced such a draconian law with: “Inasmuch as society is moving toward a world citizenship that demands accurate personal identification, it behooves the state of Kansas to assist every person in acquiring such. State and local governments will establish a birth certificate or its equivalent and/or record of naturalized citizenship for every resident; will provide funding and assistance for research and witnesses, if necessary, to establish evidence of birth and/or citizenship; will assist in every way possible the naturalization of any noncitizen resident; and will provide every resident of the state with a verified identification.”

One goal of the next legislative session ought to be amending the SAFE Act by retitling it the “Personal Identification Act of 2015” and adding the above goals and designated funds. It is not fair to dump the total burden of proof of birth/citizenship on individuals, especially the aged, infirm, handicapped and poor. All citizens of Kansas ought to receive better treatment from their government.

Boots not required

“Charlie Wilson’s War” was a great movie. It was based on a true story about a very successful covert U.S. operation during the Soviet war in Afghanistan. What seemed impossible without “boots on ground” was made possible by former Texas Rep. Charlie Wilson and President Reagan’s team.

Lawless president

President Obama has established a record of violation of U.S. laws. His administration has sold weapons illegally to Mexican drug gangs through Operation Fast and Furious. It has repeatedly granted illegal “waivers” of the Affordable Care Act. It failed to protect our ambassador to Libya. It helped bring down moderate Muslim governments in Egypt and Libya, which were replaced by more radical Muslims.

Obama has drastically reduced our military strength and morale, increased unemployment, increased our indebtedness, weakened our economy, promoted homosexuality and made us less able to resist enemy attack – either externally or internally.

Our federal government, president, Congress and Supreme Court are in violation of our Constitution and are setting up our country to be attacked internally by terrorists. Our only hope is that our states rise up to protect us from these dangers by taking a stand against federal agencies acting in violation of the Constitution.

Treated unfairly

When it comes to President Obama, the critics are everywhere, and have been since the day back in 2008 when he overcame Hillary Clinton to win the Democratic Party’s nomination for president.

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, pledged to work with the president but quickly had to reverse direction when other House Republicans declared that not only would they not work with Obama, but they would work to make sure Obama was not re-elected in 2012.

Never before has an American president been treated with such disdain and criticism. The most recent closest example would be Bill Clinton.

As a result, for many Americans, including those in the press and broadcast media, it is much simpler to just blame the president rather than take time to look at the facts or to not just worry about ratings and readership.

Obama is not perfect, but for the GOP and the radical right to fault him 100 percent is truly remarkable in our history as a nation. Could it be that to some degree it has to do with the color of his skin?

Didn’t honor contract

Can you say “breach of contract”?

In 2008, USD 259 proposed a “contract” between itself and the citizens of the school district. Basically, the school board was saying, “If you will agree to give us the money requested, then we will do this list of projects.” Included among that list was the renovation of Southeast High School and a new smaller high school to be constructed farther out in the southeast part of the district.

In good faith, voters (including me) approved this contract, which the school board then later decided to change. Southeast is to be abandoned as a school and put to “other use” and a new $60 million large school erected. This should not be allowed.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice – well, that’s not going to happen. Never again will I trust the board in future requests to honor a contract.

This story was originally published September 19, 2014 at 7:05 PM with the headline "Letters on voting law, boots on ground, lawless president, Obama’s unfair treatment, reneging on school bond."